I was looking over the Telus presentation and the CCTS presentation.
The CCTS states, "they don't know what a contract is".
Telus states a contract is only the terms and conditions.
So for example, let's say you buy a 10-meg service with 5-gigs per month.
Telus's terms of service doesn't state/define how much usage you will get (nor the speed for that matter).
So when you see a big flashy ad on TV, billboard, bus, or newspaper touting the massive usage and speed for a 3 year contract, they don't want the ad to be part of the contract, just the terms and conditions which doesn't state speed or usage.
Let us make an analogy here:
1. You lease a car
2. It says you are allowed 30,000 KM/year on that 3 year lease.
3. Ford send you a notice that now you can only use 10,000K/year
4. Ford states it doesn't matter what they advertised and sold to you, the terms and conditions don't specify what you will have.
5. So now you are on the hook for more money
6. Ford states you can not break the contract
7. CCTS pretends they don't know what the contract is or was. Or what even defines the contract.
Something seem funny to you? It should. Telus and all the ISP's and wireless carriers are now trying to force the CRTC and the CCTS to change the definition of a contract.
In addition to this new definition that is only applicable to telecom contracts (and in their own world), they have to do away with provincial contractual laws and provincial Consumer Protections in order to fit and apply their new definition of a contract as law in all of Canada.
PIAC is supporting this.
Bell is supporting this.
Rogers is supporting this.
Telus is supporting this.
CWTA is supporting this.
CCTS is playing dumb.
And maybe others...
Quebec did good by walking away from them. And now we know why they did walk away. Manitoba and Nova Scotia should be doing similar.
CCTS Submission to the CRTC asking what a contract is:Definitions
Contract What exactly is the contract?
Is it the Terms of Service? Does it include any documentation provided to the customer by the WSP related to their subscription? Does it include relevant WSP policies? This is particularly important in light of the number of Code provisions that reference the term, particularly the sections (such as D2) that relate to the right of WSPs to make changes to the contracts and the rights of consumers when this occurs.
BTW, if we review the Telus forum, they are trying to pull this on their customers right now.
Can anyone say, "Abuse"?